linux-kernel - [PATCH 09/35] workqueue: separate out process_one

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1277759063-24607-10-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:03:57 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	cl@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
	arjan@...ux.intel.com, oleg@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
	fweisbec@...il.com, dwalker@...eaurora.org,
	stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de, florian@...kler.org,
	andi@...stfloor.org, mst@...hat.com, randy.dunlap@...cle.com
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 09/35] workqueue: separate out process_one_work()

Separate out process_one_work() out of run_workqueue().  This patch
doesn't cause any behavior change.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c |  100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 5c49d76..8e3082b 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -402,51 +402,73 @@ int queue_delayed_work_on(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(queue_delayed_work_on);
 
+/**
+ * process_one_work - process single work
+ * @cwq: cwq to process work for
+ * @work: work to process
+ *
+ * Process @work.  This function contains all the logics necessary to
+ * process a single work including synchronization against and
+ * interaction with other workers on the same cpu, queueing and
+ * flushing.  As long as context requirement is met, any worker can
+ * call this function to process a work.
+ *
+ * CONTEXT:
+ * spin_lock_irq(cwq->lock) which is released and regrabbed.
+ */
+static void process_one_work(struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq,
+			     struct work_struct *work)
+{
+	work_func_t f = work->func;
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
+	/*
+	 * It is permissible to free the struct work_struct from
+	 * inside the function that is called from it, this we need to
+	 * take into account for lockdep too.  To avoid bogus "held
+	 * lock freed" warnings as well as problems when looking into
+	 * work->lockdep_map, make a copy and use that here.
+	 */
+	struct lockdep_map lockdep_map = work->lockdep_map;
+#endif
+	/* claim and process */
+	trace_workqueue_execution(cwq->thread, work);
+	debug_work_deactivate(work);
+	cwq->current_work = work;
+	list_del_init(&work->entry);
+
+	spin_unlock_irq(&cwq->lock);
+
+	BUG_ON(get_wq_data(work) != cwq);
+	work_clear_pending(work);
+	lock_map_acquire(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
+	lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
+	f(work);
+	lock_map_release(&lockdep_map);
+	lock_map_release(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
+
+	if (unlikely(in_atomic() || lockdep_depth(current) > 0)) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: workqueue leaked lock or atomic: "
+		       "%s/0x%08x/%d\n",
+		       current->comm, preempt_count(), task_pid_nr(current));
+		printk(KERN_ERR "    last function: ");
+		print_symbol("%s\n", (unsigned long)f);
+		debug_show_held_locks(current);
+		dump_stack();
+	}
+
+	spin_lock_irq(&cwq->lock);
+
+	/* we're done with it, release */
+	cwq->current_work = NULL;
+}
+
 static void run_workqueue(struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq)
 {
 	spin_lock_irq(&cwq->lock);
 	while (!list_empty(&cwq->worklist)) {
 		struct work_struct *work = list_entry(cwq->worklist.next,
 						struct work_struct, entry);
-		work_func_t f = work->func;
-#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
-		/*
-		 * It is permissible to free the struct work_struct
-		 * from inside the function that is called from it,
-		 * this we need to take into account for lockdep too.
-		 * To avoid bogus "held lock freed" warnings as well
-		 * as problems when looking into work->lockdep_map,
-		 * make a copy and use that here.
-		 */
-		struct lockdep_map lockdep_map = work->lockdep_map;
-#endif
-		trace_workqueue_execution(cwq->thread, work);
-		debug_work_deactivate(work);
-		cwq->current_work = work;
-		list_del_init(cwq->worklist.next);
-		spin_unlock_irq(&cwq->lock);
-
-		BUG_ON(get_wq_data(work) != cwq);
-		work_clear_pending(work);
-		lock_map_acquire(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
-		lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
-		f(work);
-		lock_map_release(&lockdep_map);
-		lock_map_release(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
-
-		if (unlikely(in_atomic() || lockdep_depth(current) > 0)) {
-			printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: workqueue leaked lock or atomic: "
-					"%s/0x%08x/%d\n",
-					current->comm, preempt_count(),
-				       	task_pid_nr(current));
-			printk(KERN_ERR "    last function: ");
-			print_symbol("%s\n", (unsigned long)f);
-			debug_show_held_locks(current);
-			dump_stack();
-		}
-
-		spin_lock_irq(&cwq->lock);
-		cwq->current_work = NULL;
+		process_one_work(cwq, work);
 	}
 	spin_unlock_irq(&cwq->lock);
 }
-- 
1.6.4.2

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/